Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Shouldn't we at least make it fail with EINVAL if "who" doesn't match >> whichever semantics this code is able to implement?
> Yeah, we only ever call it asking for our own process, but I guess we > might at some point in the future change that, so it can't hurt.. Want > me to do it, or will you? Please do, I'm going to bed ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches